Lancasters perk them?

[BnZs]

Last time I encountered 999000 I was in an La-7 and while he oiled me I destroyed one of his bombers.  The others were all gone before I could make another pass.

"The others were all gone before I could make another pass"

Clarify.

[BnZs]

Last time I encountered 999000 I was in an La-7 and while he oiled me I destroyed one of his bombers.  The others were all gone before I could make another pass.

I'm guessing you mean there were other friendlies attacking the formation with you. So here is the scenario: You were in very fast aircraft heavily armed with nose mounted cannon, attacking a buff formation with help (I'm guessing, again, if I'm wrong correct me). In this scenario, a single individual commanding the buff formation, fighting more than one individual player, was able to severely damage your plane in exchange for one of his bombers. It is reasonable to extrapolate that if you had been alone and tried to destroy the other two drones there would have been a very good chance of him shooting you down. At best you were left with a severely damaged plane that needed to RTB. IOW, the scenario you describe plays out more or less exactly according to what I said, yet you still call them "easy kills". That is cognitive dissonance.

[Wiley]

The story of your stats is that you don't hunt buffs that often, when you do it is often in a plane that is above average for taking on buffs, and even though you are an experienced pilot, they still get you regularly. Pretty good demonstration of what I'm saying.

Bolded part is a fairly important part of the discussion.  What's 'adequate' for buff hunting?  To me, I don't like to have less than 6x50, or in a cannon bird 2x20mm.  Anything less than that is anemic for buff hunting.  I've done it, but it's more difficult than with the above thresholds.

I looked at my stats this tour, ballpark 4-1 on most buff types, and I know I've been attacking a LOT of them from bad angles, not setting up properly at all.  I'd say at least 3/4 of the time if not more, I was alone on most of my attacks.

I don't think we should be looking at whether buffs are too dangerous unless they're being attacked by something that has a reasonable chance to set up and attack them properly and has enough guns on it to kill them effectively.

Wiley.

[Lusche]

And this guy...I love him, but he's one of the premiere shooters of the game (whether or not he will admit it), and most of his buff kills this tour appear to be in either an Me-163 or a Ta-152. An experten flying 30mm-packing dedicated interceptors talking about how easy it is to kill buffs does not quite represent the whole story.

I have not claimed at all it does. And  I'm not the one singling out a single player and the occasional incidents.

Oh, and while at it: You are free to inquire my non-30mmm monster K/D's versus heavy bombers, for example P-47D11 or P-51B and so on

[BnZs]

I have not claimed at all it does. And  I'm not the one singling out a single player and the occasional incidents.

When a player uses his playing experience to prove a point in discussion here, I feel justified in looking at stats to get hard numbers on these experiences. No personal offense is intended towards anyone.

The numbers Bozon cited earlier, many types of formation having a K/D close to 1:1 DESPITE how suicidally they are flown, that is the telling stat, all our personal experiences aside.

[bozon]

I have shot down 20 vs the 4 that have got me. Looks like I get more than I get got, and I fly planes with 50 cals most of the time.

So ya I think your exaggeration is a bit out there.

Since bombers get 3 strikes, your 20:4 ratio is equivalent to 7:4, which is about the same as your general K/D vs. fighters. In other words, you chances of sending another player to the tower versus him sending you to the tower are the same whether he is in a fighter or in a bomber. I'd say it is likely much worse against a bomber because vs. a bomber you can disengage at will, or kill one drone and let the other two go, thus limping away with your kills to land your stricken plane, pushing K/D higher.

[Lusche]

When a player uses his playing experience to prove a point in discussion here, I feel justified in looking at stats to get hard numbers on these experiences.

At no point I have used my personal success against bombers to "prove a point" in this thread at all. I didn't even mention it.

[BnZs]

a reasonable chance to set up and attack them properly and has enough guns on it to kill them effectively.

Wiley.

Waiting around for these twin parameters lets buffs accomplish their strategic objective in the MA more often than not. In the MA you have no idea what type or alt is coming in, you have a very short-range excuse for radar vectors. Furthermore control of 3 bombers in the MA doesn't require the effort of 30 humans from the other team, and loss of these bombers anytime after they sink the CV or blow up the hangars matters not strategically as it does not attrite the other side in any way.

[Wiley]

Waiting around for these twin parameters lets buffs accomplish their strategic objective in the MA more often than not. In the MA you have no idea what type or alt is coming in, you have a very short-range excuse for radar vectors. Furthermore control of 3 bombers in the MA doesn't require the effort of 30 humans from the other team, and loss of these bombers anytime after they sink the CV or blow up the hangars matters not strategically as it does not attrite the other side in any way.

So you're effectively saying bombers should be balanced through perks/eny/whatever toward poor attacks with sub-optimal planes and players whose only awareness of the enemy comes from dot dar?  Not a fan of that.

Wiley.

[The Fugitive]

As a point of fact myself and many other veteran players consider taking on a heavy buff formation guaranteed death or RTB due to oiled engine/pilot wound and often avoid them. Here's a hint: When really, really, really outnumbered at a base he's defending, SHawk will up from another base and drag a box of B-17s through the red cloud in lieu of a Tempest, 262, or other possible option. It tends to be deadlier. I've seen him do it, and I've seen a whole crowd of players pointedly ignoring those 3 "free kills" when he does it, for good reason.
The fairly common phenomenon of fighters sheltering in buff defensive gunfire (it has even happened in FSO before) is as strong an indicator that something is wrong as one could imagine.

A jabo is as good as a free kill if you fly anything with speed, a formation is not.

Your the one that posted the above quote. I pointed out that as a veteran player I don't shy away from hitting buffs. One thing you didn't point out in your analysis is that I only have 80 kills this month and that more than a quarter of them are in a buff or GV. So of my remanding 50+ kills almost more than a third, almost half of my kills in a fighter are buffs. Oh and most of my death to buffs are from collisions.

A couple of other "veterans" have posted they also don't shy away from buffs so again you prove you post another post full of BS.

Since bombers get 3 strikes, your 20:4 ratio is equivalent to 7:4, which is about the same as your general K/D vs. fighters. In other words, you chances of sending another player to the tower versus him sending you to the tower are the same whether he is in a fighter or in a bomber. I'd say it is likely much worse against a bomber because vs. a bomber you can disengage at will, or kill one drone and let the other two go, thus limping away with your kills to land your stricken plane, pushing K/D higher.

The point is he was saying many vets avoid going after buffs as it is a "guaranteed death or RTB due to oiled engine/pilot wound".

So what point are you trying to make? I would think that with all the guns a buff has he should have a much better chance at taking me out loooonnnnngggggg before I should be able to take him out yet, many of us have no trouble doing so..... and people want to perk them? 

 

[Karnak]

I'm guessing you mean there were other friendlies attacking the formation with you. So here is the scenario: You were in very fast aircraft heavily armed with nose mounted cannon, attacking a buff formation with help (I'm guessing, again, if I'm wrong correct me). In this scenario, a single individual commanding the buff formation, fighting more than one individual player, was able to severely damage your plane in exchange for one of his bombers. It is reasonable to extrapolate that if you had been alone and tried to destroy the other two drones there would have been a very good chance of him shooting you down. At best you were left with a severely damaged plane that needed to RTB. IOW, the scenario you describe plays out more or less exactly according to what I said, yet you still call them "easy kills". That is cognitive dissonance.

I was in a slow La-7 that had just taken off.  I attacked from the right, slightly below his formation.  That others were coming in behind me is irrelevant as he was shooting at me and none of them were shooting at him.  Despite  that, I destroyed one of the best bomber gunner's B-17Gs, something that you said was suicide.  If it hadn't been 999000 it is unlikely I would have even been hit.

Normally I take the time to set up proper attacks on bombers that significantly improves my odds.  In that case I just bored in and even one of the best couldn't stop me.

[BnZs]

I was in a slow La-7 that had just taken off.  I attacked from the right, slightly below his formation.

Funny thing about that, many many fighters in the game would have been just as dead with zero chance to take out your oil, if you were attacking their six with an La7 with controlled closure and your skill level. (Interesting thing about bombers is how the render that skill level irrelevant, which is great for the game and super-fun  )

 That others were coming in behind me is irrelevant as he was shooting at me and none of them were shooting at him.

It's perfectly relevant. You didn't make an attempt to take out the other two buffs. He would certainly have gotten you if he did, he already severely damaged you after one pass.

 Despite  that, I destroyed one of the best bomber gunner's B-17Gs, something that you said was suicide.

You destroyed ONE plane in the formation, at a cost of a severely damaged oiled plane. This is exactly what I said would happen. You said yourself you did not take out the other two. A thing unmentioned by you is how many other attackers 999000 oiled/destroyed flying low and outnumbered, unmentioned because it would probably support my point.

  If it hadn't been 999000 it is unlikely I would have even been hit.

You say it is unlikely you would have been hit approaching B-17s low and from the right?  

The thing about bomber gunnery in AHII is that is essentially a point and click enterprise, unlike fighters where you actually have to fly sight onto target. 999000's skill was overkill to take you out.

I remember a particular weekend where I encountered a single player repeatedly during CV defenses. No judgement intended, but he was fairly helpless to do anything but die when I encountered him flying fighter. However, when driving buffs, he was often able to force me to pull off with a damaged plane. That is as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to find in AHII, and it demonstrates as clearly as possible that the buff formation has a very legitimate claim to being one of the most dangerous "fighters" in this game.

Normally I take the time to set up proper attacks on bombers that significantly improves my odds.  In that case I just bored in and even one of the best couldn't stop me.

The fact that it is necessary to have more energy advantage to reliably take on bombers than fighters in this game argues in favor of my point, not yours. What you and others are essentially saying is "Bombers are easy kills, as long as I have a large energy advantage, my choice of planes best suited for the job, and all the time I need.*" Um, excuse me, but what planes AREN'T easy kills under those rather artificial parameters?

*(Oooh, fun! I think I'll play that game. The Me-262 on take off/approach with a P-47M-as easy a kill as can be imagined. Well now, unperk those silly jets, they appear to be "free kills"  )

[BnZs]

The statistical analysis does not lie Fugi. You have 16 A2A kills (I disregarded your two kills of Liberators in shipguns) of B17, B24, and 3 deaths to them. These 16 kills divided by 3 means that you have encountered someone driving a heavy buff formation about 5 times, putting your k/d against heavies at about 5 to 3.

By comparison you have 13 kills of a P-51D this tour, against only 3 deaths to P-51Ds.

The statistics don't lie Fugi, and they clearly demonstrate that heavy bomber formations are actually more dangerous to you than P-51Ds.

[BnZs]

Since bombers get 3 strikes, your 20:4 ratio is equivalent to 7:4, which is about the same as your general K/D vs. fighters. In other words, you chances of sending another player to the tower versus him sending you to the tower are the same whether he is in a fighter or in a bomber. I'd say it is likely much worse against a bomber because vs. a bomber you can disengage at will, or kill one drone and let the other two go, thus limping away with your kills to land your stricken plane, pushing K/D higher.

QFT.

B-17s have a k/d of .39 this tour. However, if we apply the "rule of 3" as explained by Bozon above, the formation in fact has a k/d of about 1.17 against all comers, despite bail-and-bombers, ack, and 5'' ship guns.

Here is a partial list of fighters which have a k/d lower than 1.17 in the LWMA for tour 170:
All three variants of the Zero.

EVERY 109 variant except the K4!

The vaunted Brewster.

The C205.

The venerable Hellcat.

The 190 A8.

The Hurricane Mk.IIc !

The La5. (The La7 isn't all that much higher than 1.17, at 1.21!!!)

The N1K. (Even I was a bit surprised by that one!)

The P38L

Every P40 variant.

The P-47D40 and P-47N.

The P-51B.

Every SINGLE Spitfire variant appears to have a k/d lower than the B-17 formation!!!
Let me repeat that for emphasis. Every single Spitfire variant, including the XVI, has a lower k/d than the B-17 formation this tour.

And last but not least, every single Yak variant.

Free kills?  

[BnZs]

I am suggesting that bombers have been given any number of unrealistic advantages such, F3, multiple planes for a single player, slaving of all defensive guns together. I am suggesting that when it can be demonstrated that such advantages allow the formation to have k/ds in the neighborhood of 1:1 while carrying tens of thousands of bombs then it has gone too far, and something has gotta give. If there were any fighter-bombers that could carry a bomb load into the tens of thousands of pounds while simultaneously maintaining a k/d around 1, the cries to perk that plane would be deafening. This is exactly what heavy buff formations are capable of, as the statistics for every single tour demonstrate. But for some reason there is a great deal of cognitive dissonance from players regarding bombers and their effectiveness in this game.

My first and most conservative suggestion is to lower the ENY of B17, B24, and Lancaster to 5. Removing these planes from the high-number side does much more to handicap the high-number side's war effort for balance than denying them Ponys, Spits, and Las. And players who take on buff formations, demonstrably a more dangerous proposition than fighter hunting, should get plenty of perk points for doing so.

So you're effectively saying bombers should be balanced through perks/eny/whatever toward poor attacks with sub-optimal planes and players whose only awareness of the enemy comes from dot dar?  Not a fan of that.

Wiley.